General scientific methods logical and historical. Historical and logical methods

HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL

philosophy characterizing between the historically developing objective reality and its reflection in the theoretical. cognition. Historical - the formation and development of the object; logical - theoretical. reproduction of a developed and developing object in all its essential, regular connections and relations. Categories I. and l. are a concretization of the Marxist principle of historicism, requiring "... to look at each from the point of view of how the known in history arose, what main stages in its development this phenomenon went through, and from the point of view of this development, look at what this has become now" (Lenin V.I., PSS, t. 39, With. 67) .

The reflection of the historical in the logical but is reduced to a simple reproduction of the temporal sequence of the historical development of the object and is associated with the consideration of the objective process of formation (genesis) object and the result of its development, which serves as the basis for two methods of research - historical. and logical. methods. F. Engels described these research methods and their role in Marxist methodology. Considering politekono-mich. studies of K. Marx, he noted that the historical. analysis is associated with a number of difficulties, so the only appropriate was logical. method. “But this method is essentially nothing but the same historical method, only freed from historical form and from interfering accidents. From where it begins, the train of thought must begin with the same, and its further will be nothing but a reflection of the historical process in an abstract and theoretically consistent form; reflection corrected, but corrected according to the laws that the actual historical process gives, and each can be considered at that point in its development where the process reaches full maturity, its classical form " (Engels F., cm. Marx K. and Engels F., Works, t. 13, With. 497) . T. about., logical the method is a way of reproducing a historically developing object as a result, the result of a definition. process, during which the necessary for its further existence and development as a sustainable systemic education were formed. Marx noted that the temporal sequence in history can correspond to the sequence of consideration with the help of logical. method; in such cases, "... the course of abstract thinking, ascending from the simplest to the complex, corresponds to the actual ... historical process" (ibid., t. 46, part 1, With. 39) . However, in itself, the temporal sequence of the historical phenomena can not serve as a guide for theoretical. analysis of their relationships in the existing and reproducing system. Mismatch And. and l. due to the fact that not all phenomena that act as factors in the genesis of the system are included in the necessary conditions for its reproduction and development: many of them are eliminated in the course of historical development. process. The time sequence of the historical phenomena often does not predetermine the real genetic. connection of phenomena in the process of formation of one or another historical. education. Marx emphasized that the sequence of consideration of the sides of the object under study (modern him a capitalist society) is determined by "... the relationship in which they are to each other in modern bourgeois society, and this relationship is directly opposite to that which seems natural or corresponds to the sequence of historical development" (ibid. With. 44) .

The study of the functioning, reproduction and development of a historically established object with the help of logical. method involves identifying its historical. perspectives, considering it in the unity of the present, past and future. Marx in Capital not only explores modern him, but also theoretically substantiates the direction of its development - the prospect revolutionary, socialist transformation of society. However, the theoretical Marx's ideas in "Capital" necessarily presupposes genetic. processes.

Logic interaction. and historical methods in constructing the theory of developing organic. object is complex, multi-stage. Appeal to the historian method - logical. method. At the same time, to study the genesis of an object, it is necessary to have some initial information about its essence. Such a hypothetical and representation usually precedes the genetic. object, which reveals the incompleteness of this theoretical. prerequisites, clarifies and modifies it; the refined premise, in turn, acts as the basis of genetic. object analysis.

The developed gives a deeper and fuller understanding in history of what is given in it in an undeveloped form. "Human Anatomy - Key to Monkey Anatomy" (Marx K., ibid., t. 12, With. 731) . At the same time, a developed state in history reveals in it only that which is genetically connected precisely with it, and often fails to grasp other tendencies and possibilities of development. Absoluteization of knowledge about the developed state of the object leads to the deformation of the historical. pictures of development, to the denial of the diversity of its historical. forms. Revealing the study bourgeois society to understand previous social structures, Marx at the same time sharply criticized the apologetics. classical attempts. political economy submit bourgeois society and economy as a kind of networks. the crown of development and the standard for assessing the entire historical. process (cm. there, t. 46, part 1, With. 23) .

As one of the components of the dialectical method, unity I. and l. serves as the basis for comprehending the essence and patterns of complex developing objects.

Marx K. and Engels F., Works, t. 13; t. 46, part 1; Lenin V.I., Philos. notebooks, teaching staff, t. 29; Grushin B. A., Essays on the logic of the historical. research, M., 1961; D about b p and i-n about in V. S., Methodological. theoretical problems. and historical knowledge, M., 1968; The principle of historicism in knowledge social phenomena, M., 1972; Ilyenkov E. V., Dialectic. , M., 1974; Dialectics scientific knowledge. Dialectical essay. logics, M., 1978; Materialistic . Brief essay on theory, M., 1980; Kelle V. Zh., Kovalzon M. Ya., Theory and history. (Problems of the theory of historical process), M., 1981.

V. S. Shvyrev.

Philosophical encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .

HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL

HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL - see Logical and historical.

New Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001 .

See what "HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL" is in other dictionaries:

historical and logical- HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL categories and methods of knowledge. I. reveals the specific features of the development of a given object, shows its chronology, and reveals its unique individual features. As a method, I. is more often used in ... ...

See Historical and Logical. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. Moscow: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983. LOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

- “LOGICAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE WORLD” (Der logische Aulbau der Welt. V., 1928) the first major philosophical work R. Carnap, written during the period of his active participation in the work of the Vienna Circle. The combination of logic and empiricism carried out in it became ... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

- (Der logische Aufbau der Welt. V., 1928) - the first major philosophical work of R. Carnap, written during his active participation in the work of the Vienna Circle. The combination of logic and empiricism carried out in it became the basis of research ... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

Essential moments of the development of the objective world and methods of its cognition. There are objective logic and history of the development of an object and methods of cognition of this object. Objectively logical is common line, the pattern of development of the object ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Boundaries of the natural-science formation of concepts. Logical introduction to the historical sciences- “BORDERS OF NATURAL SCIENCE FORMATION OF CONCEPTS. LOGICAL INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORICAL SCIENCES ”(“ Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung ”. (Tubingen. 1902; Russian translation: St. Petersburg, 1903) the main epistemological work of the leader ... ... Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science

THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE (epistemology)- an integral part of Russian. philosophical thought throughout its history, the significance and proportion of the swarm increased but as the latter reached higher levels of maturity. As a relatively independent area of philosophical ... ... Russian Philosophy: Dictionary

Theory of knowledge- (epistemology) an integral part of philosophy and Russian. philosophical thought throughout its history, the significance of the swarm increased as the latter reached higher levels of maturity. As a relatively independent area ... ... Russian Philosophy. Encyclopedia

philosophical categories that reveal important features development process, as well as the relationship between the logical development of thought and the real history of the subject. I. expresses the structural and functional processes of the emergence and formation of a given object, L. - those relationships, laws, connections and interactions of its parties, to-rye exist in the developed state of the object. I. refers to L. as a process of development to its result, in which the connections that are successively formed in the course of real history have reached “full maturity, their classical form” (Engels). I. and l. are in dialectical unity, which includes the moment of contradiction. Their unity is expressed, firstly, in the fact that I. contains in itself L. to the extent that any process of development contains its own objective orientation, its own necessity, leading to a certain result. Although at the beginning of the process there is still no linearity, as an expression of the developed structure of the object, the sequence of phases passed through by the process, in general, coincides with the relation (logical connection) in which the components of the developed system are located, i.e., the process, as it were carries its own result. Secondly, the unity of I. and l. is expressed in the fact that the ratio and interdependence of the sides of a developed whole reflect in a peculiar way the history of the formation of this whole, the history of the formation of its specific structure. The result contains in itself in a “removed” form the movement that gave rise to it: L. contains in itself I. But although the unity of I. and l. is of decisive importance for understanding the relationship between the history of an object and its developed form, they coincide only in general and as a whole, because in an object that has reached full maturity and classical form, everything accidental, transient, all those zigzags of development disappear and are lost. -rye are inevitable in a really ongoing process. L. is “corrected” I., but this “correction” is carried out “according to the laws that the actual historical process itself gives ...” (Engels). From this follows the difference in the logical and historical ways of reflecting reality in thinking. The difference between these methods of research is not simply and not only a difference in the subjective goals of research: it has its own objective basis. Precisely because in reality the process and the result of development do not coincide, although they are in unity, a difference in the content of the historical and logical methods of research is inevitable. The task of historical research is to reveal the specific conditions and forms of development of certain phenomena, the sequence of their transitions from one historically necessary stage to another. The task of logical research is to reveal the role that individual elements of the system play as part of a developed whole. But since the developed whole retains only those conditions and moments of its development that express its specific character, then the logical reproduction of the developed whole turns out to be the key to revealing its real history. “Human anatomy is the key to monkey anatomy” (Marx). At the same time, the facets that distinguish these two methods of research are conditional, mobile, because L., in the final analysis, is the same I., only freed from its specific form, presented in a generalized, theoretical form, and vice versa: I. is that same L., only clothed in the flesh and blood of a specific historical development. The dialectic of I. and L. expresses an essential aspect of dialectical logic, revealing the general laws of knowledge of objective development processes.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

historical and logical

HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL- categories and methods of knowledge. I. reveals the specific features of the development of a given object, shows its chronology, and reveals its unique individual features. As a method, I. is more often used in studies of living matter, society, psychology, and history. It is characteristic of the neo-Kantianism of the Baden school, Simmel, Nelson, Frey and others; historicism is based on it as the principle of considering the world in its emergence and change. L. reflects things and phenomena in a generalized form, emphasizes the normative and objective aspects of the object under consideration, gives its theoretical concept, brings it out essence in system abstractions. L. often defines the categories of the object under study in relation to the universal categories of logic. As a method, linearity is more often used in sciences that abstract from the content and historical development of things, where there is a preference for synchronous analysis over diachronic ones, for example, in mathematics. The logical approach is characteristic of Western European scholastic science, for a number of schools and trends in logic, philosophy and linguistics of the late 19th and 20th centuries. (logical positivism, analytical philosophy). Frege, Russell, early Wittgenstein, Carnap, and others undertook a logical analysis the language of science in order to determine the boundaries of the true knowledge. The late Wittgenstein, Ryle, Strawson, Austin and others turned to the logical analysis of ordinary language, the communicative aspect of speech. There are attempts to apply a logical approach to the analysis of history; for example, Collingwood's logic of questions and answers, Popper's situational logic, Hempel's theory of enveloping law, Danto's narrative logic, Ankersmit's narrative logic, etc. The difference between the historical and logical methods is relative, they are interconnected and are inseparably used in scientific knowledge. Historical and logical methods express the principle of unity of I. and l. as a side of the dialectical method; the essence of dialectical logic: logical knowledge is a reflection of the historical development of the object. Kant postulated the primacy of the logical system in cognition in relation to the real historical process. Hegel considered the process of cognition as a successive development of logical categories and came to the conclusion that logic is a schematized history of cognition, and the history of cognition is a consistently developing system of logical categories. At the same time, he understood development as the deployment of the definitions laid down in the Idea, so it is not the content of the concept that changes, but its form; priority of L. is preserved, I. is subordinated to L. According to the Marxist interpretation dialectic, L. is I., freed from accidental and inessential. L. is a generalized and corrected reproduction of I., a necessity revealed by historical research. I. and l. match not in details, but in the end. For example, the coincidence of the historical development of ancient philosophy and the logic of the final philosophical system of Aristotle. The historically antecedent can in logic turn into the subsequent, since the logical reproduction of a developed whole is the key to revealing its history. Thus, a more concrete and meaningful form can be genetically developed from a less concrete one in order to reproduce a single whole. The history of knowledge shows the sequence of development of the categories of logic, and logic corrects the evidence of history on the basis of the revealed whole. This makes it possible to reproduce in consciousness the development of knowledge, to show its history and theory, and also to reproduce in a certain sequence the universal aspects and laws of nature, society and human thinking. Materialism proclaims the priority of I. over L., which, on the one hand, allows us to avoid rigid schematism, on the other hand, it is unreasonable to consider the development of knowledge and the development of any material process as identical as the course of emergence, the development of one’s essence in interconnection with other processes. full development of its nature. M.A. Kukartseva

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL

philosophy categories that characterize the relationship between the historically developing objective reality and its reflection in the theoretical. cognition. Historical - the process of formation and development of the object; logical - theoretical. reproduction of a developed and developing object in all its essential, regular connections and relations. Categories I. and l. are a concretization of the Marxist principle of historicism, requiring “... to look at each issue from the point of view of how a well-known phenomenon in history arose, what main stages in its development this phenomenon went through, and from the point of view of this development, look at what this thing has now become "(Lenin V.I., PSS, vol. 39, p. 67).

de to-rogo the necessary conditions for its further existence and development as a stable systemic formation were formed. Marx noted that the temporal sequence in history can correspond to the sequence of consideration with the help of logical. method; in such cases, "... the course of abstract thinking, ascending from the simplest to the complex, corresponds to the actual ... historical process" (ibid., vol. 46, part 1, p. 39). However, in itself, the temporal sequence of the historical phenomena can not serve as a guide for theoretical. analysis of their relationships in the existing and reproducing system. Mismatch And. and l. due to the fact that not all phenomena that act as factors in the genesis of the system are included in the necessary conditions for its reproduction and development: many of them are eliminated in the course of historical development. process. The time sequence of the historical phenomena often does not predetermine the real genetic. connection of phenomena in the process of formation of one or another historical. education. Marx emphasized that the sequence of consideration of the aspects of the object under study (modern capitalist society) is determined by “... the relationship in which they are to each other in modern bourgeois society, and this relationship is directly opposite to that which seems natural or corresponds to the sequence historical development” (ibid., p. 44).

The study of the functioning, reproduction and development of a historically established object with the help of logical. method involves identifying its historical. perspectives, considering it in the unity of the present, past and future. Marx in "Capital" not only explores the modern. capitalism to him, but also theoretically substantiates the direction of its development - the prospect of a revolutionary, socialist. transformation of society. However, the theoretical the development of Marx's ideas in "Capital" necessarily involves an appeal to the genetic. processes.

Logic interaction. and historical methods in constructing the theory of developing organic. object is complex, multi-stage nature. Appeal to the historian method - the premise is logical. method. At the same time, in order to study the genesis of an object, it is necessary to have some initial idea of its essence. Such a hypothetical and abstract presentation usually precedes the genetic. analysis of the object, to-ry reveals the incompleteness of this theoretical. prerequisites, clarifies and modifies it; the refined premise, in turn, acts as the basis of genetic. object analysis.

A developed object makes it possible to understand more deeply and more fully in history what is given in it in an undeveloped form. “Human anatomy is the key to monkey anatomy” (Marx K., ibid., vol. 12, p. 731). At the same time, the projection of a developed state onto history reveals in it only that which is genetically connected precisely with it, and often fails to capture other development tendencies and possibilities. Absoluteization of knowledge about the developed state of the object leads to the deformation of the historical. pictures of development, to the denial of the diversity of its historical. forms. Revealing the importance of studying bourgeois. society to understand previous social structures, Marx at the same time sharply criticized apologetic. classical attempts. political economy to present bourgeois. society and economy as a kind of networks. the crown of development and the standard for assessing the entire historical. process (see ibid., vol. 46, part 1, p. 23).

As one of the components of the dialectical method, the principle of unity I. and l. serves as a methodology, the basis for comprehending the essence and patterns of complex developing objects.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

LOGICAL AND HISTORICAL

philosophical and methodological categories that characterize the relationship between the historically developing objective reality and its reproduction by means of scientific and theoretical knowledge. In its most general form, the relationship between the logical and the historical suggests that scientific thought, directed at an object that has its own history, must proceed from this historicity and strive to realize it. The implementation of this initial fundamental setting of the unity of the logical and historical is connected, however, with the use of various means and methods of scientific research, which by no means can be reduced to simply tracing an empirically given temporal sequence of phenomena, since historical reality itself appears in various forms, taking into account the uniqueness of which is a necessary condition. constructive analysis of the problem of logical and historical. Thus, in the historical process as a whole, it is necessary to single out the periods of formation of certain stable structures and the periods of their reproduction on their own basis (the so-called organismic systems in nature and society), which, along with the functioning of these systems, also involve the processes of their development. Considering history as a process of formation and/or destruction of stable formations, one can set the task of studying them as close as possible to the specifics of this historical process, or the task of its logical reconstruction in a general schematic form. Accordingly, one can speak of historical or logical methods in the sense noted above. When analyzing historically formed organismic systems capable of reproduction and development, the application of a system-structural approach to them does not at all imply tracing the path of their formation both in the variant of the specifics of the historical method, and in the variant of its logical reconstruction.

Since, however, within the historically formed wholes there are such elements and connections that cannot be understood without referring to the past, the “logical method” of the system-structural study of such wholes must presuppose elements of the “historical method”, i.e., along with the primacy of “synchrony » include elements of «diachrony». This "logical method", together with elements of the "historical method", should be included in a broader historical context consideration, which involves addressing not only the reproduction of the system in the present, but also its origins and possible prospects in the future. Only such an approach can overcome the danger of absolutization and apologetization in the "logical" approach of the system under consideration and characterize its assertion as the result of one of the possible trends of history. The historicism of theoretical thought ultimately acts as a necessary condition for understanding the multivariance of historically developing reality.

The relationship between the logical and the historical as a methodological problem was first considered by the founders of Marxism when characterizing the method of "Capital". and from interfering accidents ”(K. Marx, F. Engels Soch., vol. 13, p. 497), can rather be considered as a statement of the problem, since this formulation does not differentiate between the logical reconstruction of the historical process of formation and the logical method of reproducing an existing the history of the system. Describing his method, Marx more clearly and resolutely emphasized that the sequence of consideration of the aspects of the object he studied - contemporary capitalist society - is determined by their relationship within the framework of the established and self-reproducing system: “It would be impossible and erroneous to interpret economic categories in the sequence in which they have historically played a decisive role. On the contrary, their sequence is determined by the relationship in which they are to each other in modern bourgeois society, and this relationship is directly opposite to that which seems natural or corresponds to the sequence of historical development” (ibid., vol. 46, part 1, p. 44). At the same time, Marx notes that sometimes the temporal sequence in history can correspond to the sequence of consideration by the logical method. “In this sense, the course of abstract thinking, ascending from the simplest to the complex, corresponds to the actual historical process” (ibid., p. 39). However, even in this case, the basis of this sequence is not the temporal relationship of the phenomena under consideration, but the possibility of their theoretical derivation in the context of an established and reproducing system (for example, the “money-capital” relationship).

The reason for the discrepancy between “historical” and “logical” is, firstly, that not all phenomena that act as a factor in the genesis of an “organic system” are among the necessary conditions for its reproduction and development. Many of them are eliminated by the very objective course of the historical process, which, by the way, was taken into account by Engels when he spoke of the corrected reflection of history by a logical method, corresponding to the laws of the historical process itself. Secondly, the temporal sequence of phenomena in the observed history may not correspond to the sequence of their consideration by the logical method, since this temporal sequence does not predetermine the real genetic connection of phenomena in the formation of a given historical formation, for example, commercial capital that exists in Asian despotisms and under feudalism, - this is essentially not the commercial capital that is an element of capitalist society. Its temporal antecedence to industrial capital is not in itself a fact of the history of capitalism specifically. It does not form that "historical" which is connected with the "logical" capitalism that has taken shape.

At the same time, an appeal to the history of Marx's method, as it was embodied in Capital, in principle distinguishes this method from various variants of structural-functional and systemic-structural research, which are characterized by radical "synchronism". The interaction of logical and historical research in the construction of a theory of a complex developing object is thus of a kind of “shuttle nature”: in order to investigate the genesis of a phenomenon, it is necessary to have some idea of the essence of the phenomenon. This is a largely hypothetical, rather abstract representation that acts as a theoretical prerequisite for genetic analysis; this analysis enriches our knowledge of the essence of the subject and shows the insufficiency or incompleteness of the theoretical premise, which is refined, corrected, etc. The refined premise, in turn, acts as the basis of genetic analysis, etc.

A developed object makes it possible to understand more deeply and more fully in history what is given in it in an undeveloped form, in the form of an embryo, in the form of a “hint”, as Marx puts it. Hence Marx's well-known metaphorical expression: "Human anatomy is the key to monkey anatomy" (ibid., vol. 12, p. 731). At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the danger of absolutization of this formula, associated with the fact that the projection of the modern developed state onto history "scoops out" in it only that which is really genetically connected with modern developed states. Such an approach not only does not grasp other tendencies and possibilities of development, but even if it is unjustifiably absolutized, it can obscure and obscure it. It is possible to understand the diversity of forms of development in history only if one pays due attention to the independence of their existence and does not strive to modernize history by fitting it to some narrow modern performance about the result, considering the latter as a kind of natural crown of development and a standard for evaluating the entire historical process, as the “end of history”.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

LOGICAL AND HISTORICAL

materialistic categories. dialectics expressing the attitude of the theoretical. reproduction of the patterns of development in its general characteristics (logical) to the process of its historical. deployment in a variety of specific forms (historical). How universal characteristics logic and history of development, L. and and. are a necessary form of application of dialectic. method for constructing a truly scientific theory of the origin and development of any object. According to Engels, logical. the method of research "...is nothing else) than the same historical method, only freed from historical form and from interfering accidents" (K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 13, p. 497 ). Difference between L. and and. already outlined by Aristotle in his distinction between "first in nature" ("in essence") from "first in time". According to Aristotle, the sequence of theoretical consideration cannot and should not be a simple repetition of the order of change of phenomena in time, because from the v. sp. mind, reality does not look the same as with t. sp. feelings. perception. If for the latter the starting point is single things, then for the mind - general forms, categories, genera. But since it is the mind that reveals the truth to cognition, the order of things in the mind is also more true, corresponds to the true picture of the birth and development of things: "... the essence is the first from all points of view - both in concept, and in cognition, and in time" ( Met.VII, 1 1028a10-b3). However, clearly understanding the difference between the sensual and the universal, Aristotle was unable to explain their unity as sides of a single process of development. Therefore, he opposed scientific knowledge (????????), as knowledge of the necessary and universal, to opinion (????) - feelings. knowledge of the singular. In this aporia of Aristotle, the main dialectic was revealed. the difficulty of the problem. On the basis of the characteristic philosophy of the 17th-18th centuries. metaphysical understanding of nature, which deprived her of action. development in time, the problem of the relationship of L. and and. could not be presented in its entirety. The rationalists of modern times solved the problem of the relation of the universal in reality and in thought by simply denying the ca.-l. difference between them. In Descartes and the occasionalists (see Occasionalism), they express two substances, in which each action of one corresponds exactly to the action of the other. In Spinoza, these substances are transformed into attributes of a single nature, so that the connection of ideas turns out to be an identical connection of things. True, the greatest thinkers of modern times have guesses about the fundamental relationship of the form of theoretical. deduction with the concept of development. So, Descartes, starting to build his system of the world, to deduce complex phenomena of the simplest particles, justifies his right to such a method of constructing the trace theory. reason: "Their nature (things. - Ed.) is much easier to know, seeing their gradual emergence than considering them as completely finished" (Izbr. Proizv., M., 1950, p. 292). A fundamentally correct solution to the problem of the logical relationship. sequence ("order and connection of ideas") to the sequence of the birth of things in nature outlined by Spinoza. Dr. the form of solving the problem of the relation of the sequence of development of concepts to the order of changes in reality is represented by the nominalism of Hobbes and the sensationalism of Locke, Condillac, as well as subjective-idealistic. concepts of Berkeley and Hume. For this position, the view turned out to be natural, according to Krom logical. the order of development of concepts is dictated only by the immanent nature of thinking and does not stand in any relation to the sequence of development of an object in time. The problem, therefore, is simply removed from consideration. The most complete problem is the relationship between L. and and. came before philosophy only at the beginning of the 19th century. Most mean, the stage in its consideration turned out to be him. classical philosophy crowned with the Hegelian system. Being an idealist, Hegel considered the history of mankind, i.e. the history of civilization, science and morality, including the production of material life, as an external manifestation of the logical. the powers of the mind. Empirical the history of mankind with this t. sp. inevitably appears as an external embodiment of the logical. began as a logical one, only deployed in time. Denying development to nature, Hegel thus considered only one (and, moreover, derivative) aspect of the problem - the question of the relation of the logic of developed thinking to the history of the formation of this logic. The historical was presented in his philosophy as an imperfect, distorted form of the logical. However, in this inverted form, the coincidence of logical was first established. the sequence of the process of development of concepts with a scientifically understood sequence of historical. process, because the logic of developed thinking is in fact the result of the entire history of practical. and spiritual development humanity, an abbreviated generalized reflection of those real universal patterns, to which this development is subject. Understanding the role of history approach to the logical-theoretical. analysis was typical for Russian. revolutionary Democrats in the mid 19th century See, for example, N. G. Chernyshevsky: “Without the history of an object, there is no theory of the object; but even without a theory of the object, there is not even a thought about its history, because there is no concept of the object, its meaning and boundaries” (Izbr. filos. cit., vol. 1, 1950, p. 303). Dialectical-materialistic. the solution to the problem was given by Marx and Engels as a result of the critical. processing of the Hegelian concept from the positions of materialism and on the concrete material of political economy. theories. The problem in this light appeared to be more complex than that of Hegel. On the basis of materialism, the question became as follows: in what regular connection is the theory (i.e., the logical reflection of the object), firstly, with the history of the reflected object itself and, secondly, with the history of man. knowledge about it, with the history of the theory itself. It is clear that the direct coincidence of L. and and. not in either case. The universal (necessary, law-shaped) in history does not exist on its own, but only as an objective logic of events that take place in time and bear immediate consequences, incl. and random, specific historical characteristics. features. The latter form a specific historical object shape. The logical-universal acts in the cleared of the historical. immediacy of the form, i.e. as a logical form (see Form logical), only in theory. But what does this “purity” mean and how is it achieved? Scientific analysis in general, as a rule, "...chooses the path opposite to their (ie, objective forms. - Ed.) actual development" (Marx K., Capital, vol. 1, 1955, p. 82); "... the historical development of all sciences only through many intersecting and roundabout paths leads to their actual starting point. Unlike other architects, science not only draws castles in the air, but erects individual residential floors of the building before it laid its foundation" ( Marx K., Towards a Critique of Political Economy, 1953, pp. 46). Analyzing the history of mathematics (in "Mathematical Manuscripts"), Marx notes that the creators of the mathematical. analysis Newton and Leibniz acted from the very beginning on the basis of differential calculus, but without giving it the proper logical. proof of. This was done only later thanks to the work of a number of mathematicians - from D'Alembert, Euler and Lagrange to Cauchy and Weierstrass, who provided a strict foundation for differential calculus in the form of the theory of limits and established its connections with the "underlying" sections of mathematics. Thus, with some delay, the logically necessary links were determined unified system mathematical knowledge. The same can be found in the history of any science. The same is true of Darwin's theory. The discovery of the law of nature. selection Darwin discovered a truly universal principle of biological. development, to-ry determines the process of speciation and thus represents biological. expediency as a deterministic process. Thus, a single logical was put forward. the principle of building an integral biological system. relations. However, strictly speaking, this theoretical the system was not carried back to its origins by Darwin. The question of the nature and mechanism of heredity was not resolved by him, an exhaustive solution of this issue, which would reveal a logical. there is still no connection between heredity and the process of speciation, although biochemistry and genetics have made significant progress in the study of the cellular mechanisms of heredity. A similar situation is observed in the crust. time and in cosmogony, where planetary cosmogony represents an already developed theory, while stellar cosmogony arose quite recently. Therefore, the coincidence of L. and and. is not the starting point, but the result of the historical. knowledge development. For a theory, this coincidence constitutes the goal towards which it must aspire. The means of achieving it is only critical. analysis of the antecedents. theory development. Directly the problem of the relationship of L. and and. and stood before Marx in the form of a question about the method of critical. overcoming previously achieved theoretical. understanding of reality: "criticism of political economy ... could be carried out in two ways: historically or logically" (ibid., p. 235). This is due to the fact that the emergence of a new theory, i.e. new level of logic. reflection, it is necessary associated with the critical. transformation of the predecessors. theoretical steps. development. In any case, the theory is criticized through its comparison with facts, with reality. The difference between L. and and. methods of criticism of concepts (respectively, methods of theoretical analysis "of the facts expressed by them) is as follows: in the historical method, the theory compares with the very facts on the basis of which it arose, in the logical method - with the facts observed at the highest stage of maturity of the same Choosing a logical method, Marx, in particular, criticized the labor theory of value developed in the early 19th century, comparing its categories with the reality of the mid-19th century. This method had clear advantages over the historical one. It made it possible to consider every economic phenomenon at the point where it has reached full maturity and purity of expression, fully revealing its tendencies and contradictions. It is worth pointing out at least the crisis phenomena. Moreover, the facts contemporary to Marx could have been better and more carefully verified. Finally, logical method gave directly. theoretical understanding of contemporary economical development. Here is manifested the regular relationship in which the new theory (a new stage of logical development) stands in relation to the history of its preparation. The old theory and its categories, being compared with the facts observed today, at the highest point in the development of the subject, appear as an incomplete, one-sided, abstract reflection of concreteness and therefore are included as an abstract moment in a new logical. understanding. It is thereby removed as part of a deeper and more complete understanding of the new theory. The rational (objective) content of the former theory being criticized is included in the new theory, and only the idea that it was exhaustive, which it naturally seemed to its author, is discarded. The old theory is therefore interpreted as relating. truth and thus as a particular case of a more general and concrete theory. A characteristic case of such a relationship between the old and the new theory can be formulated by physics of the 20th century. "correspondence principle" (see Correspondence principle). This is due to the fact that a more general theory that arises later in time turns out to be at the same time more specific (see Concrete). This understanding was based by Marx and Engels on the dialectical-materialistic. interpretation of such categories as the universal (general), specific, etc., and without it cannot be correctly elucidated. According to the materialistic dialectic, logical analysis of facts and concepts relating to the highest stage of maturity of the particular object under study, in itself gives an essentially historical. understanding of this object, even in the case when the history that created it is not specifically studied. Marx formulated the relationship between L. and and. in the course of scientific analysis: "In order to develop the laws of bourgeois economics, there is no need to write the actual history of production relations. On the contrary, the correct contemplation and deduction of production relations, which themselves have developed historically, always leads to some first relations (in the manner of empirical numbers found in natural science), which indicate the past behind this system. These indications, together with a correct understanding of the present, also provide the key to understanding the past" ("Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen? konomie ...", M., 1939 , S. 364–65). Therefore, "human anatomy is the key to monkey anatomy" ("On the Critique of Political Economy", 1953, p. 219). This means that the lower forms of development are correctly understood only in the light of those tendencies, which are fully revealed only later, and in the composition of the lower forms are obscured, intertwined with accidents and therefore not visible. This methodological consideration is based on the fact that as a result of historical. process, i.e. in the composition of a system of phenomena that has taken shape, or has become, is preserved and, in its necessary moments, the history of its properties is constantly reproduced. origin and development. This is extremely clearly demonstrated, for example, by the biogenetic law. Therefore, the question, at first glance, purely methodological, turns into an objectively dialectical one. problem - the question of that objectively logical relationship, in which are historical. process and its own. products. Since the dialectic of the development of commodity-capitalist. society is a particular (and very characteristic) case of the dialectics of development in general, in so far as it is possible to trace the solution of the problem of the relationship between L. and I. in its general form. Theory, i.e. logical reflection, deals with the universal and necessary moments of the object under study. She is not interested in those particular moments that occur at one stage of his development and disappear without a trace at another. But the really necessary prerequisites and conditions for the emergence of any particular system of interacting phenomena persist throughout its history. Their disappearance or destruction would be tantamount to the destruction of the system itself. Moreover, if the system develops, then all the necessary and universal conditions for its existence must be present on an ever-expanding scale. This is the circumstance that any self-developing system of interacting phenomena necessarily reproduces these conditions and prerequisites (or at least its attitude towards them) by its own. movement, i.e. considers them as his product. Such is the relation of capital to the form of commodities, to money, to free labor power, and so on. Having them with their historical As presuppositions, conditions sine qua non, capital actively reproduces them as the results of its circuits and, moreover, on an ever-expanding scale. Marx directly regards this relation as a universal dialectic. a law relevant to any "organic system". "If in a developed bourgeois system each economic attitude presupposes the other in a bourgeois economic form, and if, therefore, every posited (Gesetzte) is at the same time presupposed (Voraussetzung), then this relation takes place in any organic system" ("Grundrisse ...", S. 189). And, on the contrary, each really necessary consequence of the existence of a given system necessarily turns into a condition for its further development, for example, a monopoly in the development of capitalism. independent form of development. Before that, it was only a side branch of the historically preceding system of phenomena. Analogous is the attitude, for example, of human civilization to the natural, material conditions of its emergence. It transforms - and the further, the more - conditions independent of it and prerequisites in your product Conditions and prerequisites for a specifically human being, Without ceasing to be natural facts, they turn into "organs" of the objective body of civilization and, as such, are actively reproduced by its own. movement. The conditions for the emergence of a system turn into its consequences, and therefore the relationship between its different moments acquires a cyclical, or rather, spiral character. Only under this condition the system develops and grows like a snowball. That is why the logical, i.e. a simultaneous cut through all the necessary systems shows all these moments in the same sequence, in which they actually occur and in time, i.e. historically, have become its internally necessary components. For example, if a commodity can be essentially understood independently of the analysis of the structure of capital, but not vice versa, then this also indicates that historically, in time, the commodity form developed earlier, i.e. was history, a prerequisite for the emergence of capital. In other words, a phenomenon that is more complex in essence (more developed) can also be qualified as a later one. Therefore, Marx pointed out, logical. development turns out to be "the key to understanding historical development" (see ibid., S. 565). However, Marx notes that analysis in no case can be guided simply by the sequence in which the categories under consideration have historically played a decisive role on the surface of the historical. process, and, accordingly, the sequence in which they were perceived by people (see "On the Critique of Political Economy", p. 221). The point is that the historical process The formation of a system is always accomplished on the basis of the conditions created by all antecedents. development and in a very complex interweaving with a host of other processes. And if the categories of capital in a theory that reveals only ext. the logic of the formation of the system, preceded by the category of money and value, then in reality capital was preceded by another complex system of economic. relationships, from the originality of which the theory is completely abstracted. Capital, arising at first as a "foreign body" within the feudal system, economic. relations, begins to develop in opposition to it, partly breaking its forms without a trace, partly preserving them and developing to their full value those moments that previously existed in them in the form of secondary and non-beings. trends. In the course of this becoming, capital transforms into forms of its own. self-movement, many phenomena that existed long before it (eg, trading profit, interest, etc.), from which it appears that these forms, as historically earlier, and in a logical way. analysis must precede the concept of capital. However, such forms, although they existed long before capital appeared in the property. sense of the word, in the history of the formation of capitalist. systems have gained internal. relations only where independently developed capital has transformed them into forms of its specificity. movement, and not before. Therefore logical. development corresponds only to that historical. the sequence in which the evolution of this particular system of interacting phenomena took place, and not history as a whole, given to the direct empirical. observation. In other words, the logical corresponds to the historical, but only understood in its essence, only in the genuine, internally necessary sequence of its moments, hidden from the immediate. gaze and often even the opposite of the picture he grasps. [Compare V. I. Lenin's remark that in scientific history philosophy "chronology about l and c" is optional (see Soch., v. 38, p. 360)]. Logic the order of categories in science contradicts, thus, does not work at all. history of a given concrete subject, but only the surface of phenomena and superficially understood history. A correctly understood logical. sequence coincides with correctly understood istorich. the sequence of development of this particular object of science. Developing the positions of Marx and Engels on this issue, Lenin defines logic as "... the result, the sum, the conclusion and history and knowledge of the world" (ibid., p. 81), noting that "in logic, the history of thought is must, by and large, coincide with the laws of thought" (ibid., p. 314). Dialectical-materialistic. the decision of a question on the relation L. and and. gives the researcher a methodology, guidelines. For example, it seems quite natural, if you want to know a subject historically, to begin directly with an examination of the facts of its history. However, in this case, the question immediately arises - where to start, from what moment to date the beginning of the history of this subject? It turns out that understanding the history of an object depends on how the object itself is understood, i.e. from logical aspect. E. Ilyenkov. Moscow. Historical Necessity is not a predetermined, immovable condition of movement, as the mechanists think, but is the process of its formation in the historical. development. For example, the nervous system develops in the direction of differentiation and concentration from a diffuse network structure to a developed screen-type neural system in the human cerebral cortex. At the same time, the structure of the cortex at the highest functional-morphological level. level, as it were, reproduces the principle of the net structure of the nervous system of the hydra. Qualities, to-rye characterize the nervous system of higher animals and humans, in the nervous network, for example, coelenterates, can only be found as a possibility. But in order to see such a possibility, it is necessary to investigate this elementary nervous structure from the v. sp. principles of work and structure of developed forms of the nervous system. In this movement of the laws of development lies the objective content of L. and i. as categories and their objective basis as research methods. Does the defined regularity at first stages of development of the subject or at the stage of its incomplete maturity, all the same, it is a historically determined law. and in this sense self-sufficient organic. systems. As such, the subject is always defined as historical. reality, not as a "premise", only a trend. The source of self-development of this system, constituting the internal. the content of its law, is specific, historically. space and time a certain contradiction. This historical the reality of any organic, i.e. self-developing, systems and captures the historical. method. At the same time, the self-development of the system is necessarily revealed by its transition into successively more high system, in relation to which it acts as a predecessor. step and in this sense how it works. premise. It is in this plan that the law of the self-developing process as a whole unfolds, and the logic of the development of historical antecedents is revealed in the structure of the laws of higher levels. stages. This kind of logic is historical. continuity and reproduced logical. method. Unified scientific theory developed subject possible only on the basis of such identification of the logic of the process. So, the Pavlovian reflex theory grew up on the study of reflexes of higher mammals, cortical reflexes, and only for this reason established the universal significance of the reflex as physiological. categories. In the light of this theory, the reflections of more low levels central nervous system, which were the focus of the predecessors. physiology. However, all the same, a simple transfer of the developed forms of regularity to the process of becoming the subject of research is unlawful: the former represent the need for a developed system and relate to its genesis as an already identified opportunity, trend. Therefore, genetic the study of the problem of origin, which must involve the identification of the initial category, the "cell" of the process, can be carried out in a scientific objective way, in terms of the coincidence of L. and and. only from the point of view of the developed theory. But even the logic of the higher stage of development, which is the key to the logic of the lower stages, still cannot fully coincide with the latter. The boundaries of this coincidence are determined by the fact that the end-to-end logic of the process as a whole does not cover the specifics of each of the steps of this process, in which their historical features are revealed. originality, historical concreteness. In this sense, each of the steps of a single line of development forms a specific system, and concrete-universal theoretical. its definitions, which act as universal in the context of the logic of higher levels, coincide with the lower one only in general, which, therefore, can never exhaust concreteness. Therefore L. and and. are always in relation to contradiction, as a result of which science can never be completed, not only in the study of development prospects, but also in the study of the past. M. Turovsky. Moscow. Lit.: Engels F., Anti-Dühring, M., 1957, p. 20–23; his own, Ludwig Feuerbach, in the book: Marx K. and Engels F., Izbr. Prod., vol. 2, M., 1952, p. 358–59; Lenin V.I., Philosophical Notebooks, Soch., 4th ed., vol. 38, p. 80–81, 91, 165, 173, 183, 193, 314; ?osenthal M. M., Questions of dialectics in Marx's "Capital", M., 1955; Grushin B. ?., Logical and historical methods of research in K. Marx's "Capital", "Problems of Philosophy", 1955, 4; his, Techniques and methods of reproducing historical processes of development in thinking, M., 1956 (diss.); Sitkovsky EP, Lenin on the coincidence in dialectical materialism of dialectics, logic and the theory of knowledge, "Problems of Philosophy", 1956, 2; [Rosenthal M. M.], Historical and logical, in collection: Categories of materialistic dialectics, M., 1956; Tugarinov V.P., Correlation of categories of materialistic dialectics, L., 1956; ?ozhin V.P., Marxist-Leninist dialectics as a philosophical science, L., 1957; Kuzmin E. S., System of ontological categories, Irkutsk, 1958; Bibler V.S., On the system of categories of dialectical logic, [Dushanbe], 1958; Podkorytov G. ?., Correlation of history and theory in cognition, "Problems of Philosophy", 1958, 10; Ilyenkov E. V., Logical and historical, in collection: Questions of dialectical materialism, M., 1960; his, Dialectics of the Abstract and the Concrete in Marx's "Capital", M., 1960; Rosenthal M. M., Principles of dialectical logic, M., 1960; Spirkin A. G., Origin of consciousness, M., 1960; Grushin B. ?., Essays on the logic of historical research, M., 1961; Rosenthal M. M., Lenin and dialectics, M., 1963; Kreschnak H., Zur Einheit von Logischem und Historischem in der Erkenntnistheorie, "Dtsch. Z. Philos.", 1963, Jg. 11, 4.

In the study of complex developing systems, of particular importance are historical and logical research methods. The process of development, like any other objective process of reality, is divided into a phenomenon and essence, into empirical history and the main line of development, its regularity, the reflection of which is the main goal of theoretical knowledge. This pattern can be identified in two ways: historical and logical.

historical method involves tracing history in all its fullness and diversity, generalizing empirical material and establishing on this basis a general historical pattern. But the same pattern can be revealed without referring directly to real history, but by studying the process at the highest stages of its development, which is the main goal of the logical method. The objective basis of this method is that at the highest stages of the development of an object, in the process of its functioning, the main features of the previous stages of development are reproduced. Moreover, history is fixed in the structure of the object not in all its diversity, but only in those moments that were essential for the formation, it appears here, as it were, in a form purified from accidents. Often, the connections of the elements of the present structure with the previous stages of development can be revealed only indirectly, as a result of the complex analytical and synthetic activity of human consciousness.

Scientific knowledge of developing objects equally uses both logical and historical methods. But where a direct study of the past is available, at least from the remains that have survived to the present, the historical method may prevail, where this is not possible, they use boolean method. In general, the historical and logical methods complement each other, which makes it possible to move from the structure of an existing object and the laws of its functioning to the laws of development, and vice versa, from the history of development to the structure of an existing object, that is, when studying development, the researcher turns to the present in order to in order to better understand the past, while cognizing the functioning of an object, the researcher turns to the past in order to better imagine the present.

Being closely interconnected and complementing each other, the historical and logical methods act as completely equal in their theoretical status, since from a logical point of view there is no advantage in knowing the functioning of an object compared to knowing its history. The historical method, reconstructing history, ascends from its empirical diversity to the general laws of development. The logical method, aimed at studying existing subject, also begins its movement with the identification empirical characteristics subject, followed by the allocation of the main elements of the structure, the knowledge of which is important both for understanding the functioning of the subject, and for indirectly establishing the general laws of its development.

Method, its main function.

The activity of people in any of its forms (scientific, practical, etc.) is determined by a number of factors. Its final result depends not only on who acts (subject) or what it is aimed at (object), but also on how this process is carried out, what methods, techniques, means are used in this case. This is the problem with the method. Method (Greek methodos) - in the very broad sense words - "the path to something", a way of the subject's activity in any of its forms. The concept of "methodology" has two main meanings: a system of certain methods and techniques used in a particular field of activity (science, politics, art, etc.); the doctrine of this system, the general theory of the method, the theory in action.

The main function of the method is the internal organization and regulation of the process of cognition or practical transformation of an object. Therefore, the method (in one form or another) is reduced to a set of certain rules, techniques, methods, norms of cognition and action. It is a system of prescriptions, principles, requirements that should guide in solving a specific problem, achieving a certain result in a particular area of activity. It disciplines the search for truth, allows (if correct) to save time and effort, to move towards the goal in the shortest way. The true method serves as a kind of compass, according to which the subject of knowledge and action paves its way, allows you to avoid mistakes.

F. Bacon compared the method with a lamp that illuminates the way for a traveler in the dark, and believed that one cannot count on success in studying any issue by going the wrong way. The philosopher sought to create such a method that could be an "organon" (tool) of knowledge, to provide man with domination over nature. He considered induction as such a method, which requires science to proceed from empirical analysis, observation and experiment in order to learn the causes and laws on this basis.

R. Descartes called the method "exact and simple rules", the observance of which contributes to the increment of knowledge, allows you to distinguish the false from the true. He said that it is better not to think about finding any kind of truth than to do it without any method, especially without a deductive-rationalist one.

A significant contribution to the methodology was made by German classical (especially Hegel) and materialist philosophy (especially K. Marx), who developed the dialectical method quite deeply - respectively, on idealistic and materialistic foundations.

Problems of method and methodology occupy an important place in modern Western philosophy, especially in such areas and trends as the philosophy of science, positivism and post-positivism, structuralism and post-structuralism, analytical philosophy, hermeneutics, phenomenology and others.

Each method is certainly an important and necessary thing. However, it is unacceptable to go to extremes:

a) underestimate the method and methodological problems, considering all this to be an insignificant matter, "distracting" from the real work, genuine science, etc. ("methodological negativity");

b) to exaggerate the significance of the method, considering it more important than the subject to which they want to apply it, to turn the method into a kind of "universal master key" to everything and everything, into a simple and accessible "tool" of scientific discovery ("methodological euphoria"). The fact is that "... none methodological principle cannot exclude, for example, the risk of reaching an impasse in the course of scientific research"

Science as a specific form of knowledge

Science as a specific form of knowledge. Essence, structure and functions of science in modern society What characterizes science as a system of knowledge and distinguishes it from other types of knowledge?

The problem of defining science is one of the most difficult in modern research on the theory of knowledge and philosophy of science. There are many definitions of science and scientific knowledge. Such a pluralism of approaches and methodological orientations in the definition of science is understandable and understandable, since in modern conditions it reveals its obvious polyfunctionality and can be interpreted as specific method knowledge, a social institution, a form of accumulation of knowledge and cognitive traditions, a factor in the development of production and modern technologies of activity, etc.

Science is objective, substantiated and systematically organized knowledge about the world. Scientific knowledge is free from personal and value characteristics. Science is only interested in the object. It refuses to consider all the properties and characteristics introduced by a person (subject), his abilities, skills, and even the means of cognition that a person operates with.

To the main structural components science as a systemic integrity, or the most important parameters of the existence of science, include:

Science as an activity;

Science as knowledge;

Science as a social institution.

Science as an activity is creative process subject-object interaction, aimed at the production and reproduction of new objectively true knowledge about reality.

A special analysis of scientific activity makes it possible to fix a number of characteristic features of science that distinguish it from other types of spiritual and cognitive activity and, in particular, various forms of everyday or non-specialized cognition, which are very actively used in everyday life and constitute the so-called. common sense logic.

In the structure of any (including scientific) activity, one can single out such components as the subject, object (or subject), means and methods, goals and programs, results or products. Characteristically, in all these parameters, scientific activity differs significantly from other types of cognitive activity and forms of knowledge generation. For example, in acts of everyday or non-specialized cognition, the subject, as a rule, is formed in the process of natural socialization and the assimilation of traditional skills of cognitive and practical activities. In science, a special system of professional socialization is being formed, which involves the development by the subject of a huge information array of knowledge, skills, forms and methods of communication.

Equally significant are the differences between scientific and ordinary forms of cognitive activity in terms of their object or subject. Ordinary cognition masters only those objects or subject complexes that are directly included in the structure of a person's practical activity and make up his space. lifeworld or everyday experience. Science constructs special world idealized objects, such an objective reality that is not represented in the real forms of human practical activity or in his everyday empirical experience. The subject of science is always the result of the creative construction of a type of reality that can only be mastered in future forms of practice.

Since scientific and cognitive activity is one of the most complex and developed forms of cognition of the world, it also differs significantly from other types of cognition in terms of such parameters in the structure of this activity as its means, methods, goals and programs. Modern science uses many diverse and carefully adapted to the studied subject complexes means of understanding nature, society, and spiritual and psychic reality.

Among them are:

Material means that make up the experimental-measuring or instrumental base of modern science;

Conceptual and logical means, which include specialized artificial languages and categorical systems, logical and methodological standards and standards for the organization of knowledge, its validity and objective truth;

Mathematical tools that include various systems of mathematical languages and formalisms designed to provide procedures for describing, explaining and predicting the phenomena and processes under study in accordance with the requirements of logical consistency, accuracy, meaningful certainty.

One of the distinguishing features of scientific and cognitive activity is its characteristic methodological reflection, aimed at comprehending and constantly evaluating ongoing cognitive actions, as well as developing a system special methods and means designed to optimize these actions and contribute to the achievement of objectively true knowledge about the reality under study. Unlike science, in acts of ordinary or non-specialized cognition, the methods and forms of obtaining knowledge are not recognized and analyzed. They are, as it were, melted into the fabric of real cognitive actions and are assimilated by the subject directly in the process of education, natural socialization and familiarization with certain customs and traditions.

Scientific activity is fundamentally different from other types and forms of cognition also in terms of its result, or final product. Any cognitive action ideally, it should be aimed at obtaining knowledge or information about a knowable phenomenon. However, in different forms and at different levels of cognition, this information is specified according to a number of essential features. In its content, the objective-objective aspects of the existence of phenomena and processes of reality can be represented.

It can fix subjectively and personally significant meanings of the social world and the Universe of culture. This may be information about the values, programs and goals of possible acts of activity of an individual, a social group or society as a whole. At the same time, it is very important to fix those properties and parameters that distinguish scientific knowledge as specific kind information and the end product of scientific and cognitive activity. This characteristic of science presupposes its analysis as a specific system of knowledge.

Science as knowledge. The realization of a person's cognitive attitude to the world creates the prerequisites for the transfer of cognizable objects into an ideal-sign form, in which they are de-objectified and acquire the status of knowledge. Various typologies of knowledge as a product of spiritual and cognitive activity are possible. Depending on the specifics of the cognizable reality, knowledge is distinguished as information about the objective world of nature and society; about the inner spiritual and mental world of a person, which contains ideas about the essence and meaning of self-knowledge; about the goals and ideal-theoretical programs of human activity, etc.

Each of these types of knowledge can exist in the forms of proto-scientific, extra-scientific and scientific knowledge. At the same time, scientific knowledge proper is a kind of information about the studied phenomena and processes of reality, which must satisfy a number of requirements, or criteria for scientific knowledge. This issue is one of the most controversial in modern philosophy science, and depending on the tasks and attitudes of research, they distinguish various groups scientific criteria. So, in order to fix historically specific forms of scientific knowledge and distinguish them from protoscience, a set of historical criteria of scientificity is used.

These usually include:

a) formal-logical consistency of knowledge;

b) its experimental verifiability and empirical validity;

c) the rational nature of knowledge;

d) reproducibility and semantic invariance;

e) intersubjectivity and universality. And etc.

The analysis of science as a system of knowledge can be significantly supplemented and concretized if its structural division is carried out on other grounds and in other functional "sections". So, within any scientific discipline(physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology, etc.) it is possible to isolate the structures of empirical, theoretical and metatheoretical knowledge. Each of the named structural levels organization of knowledge specifies exactly science and has a number of functional features.

There are other typologies and classifications of scientific knowledge, within which natural science, mathematical, social and humanitarian, technical knowledge are singled out; fundamental scientific knowledge, applied scientific knowledge and knowledge in the form of development projects and developments.

The essence of science (its identification in comparison with ordinary knowledge)

The science. Ordinary

1. Aims at those fragments of reality that are not yet involved in the structures of practice. Science gives a leading image of reality. It is aimed at mastering the world of everyday life, the already established world. Ordinary knowledge is born in the course of the practice of mastering this world.

2. Systemically organized and substantiated knowledge. Scientific knowledge gives an algorithm - knowing one fragment of the chain, we move along this chain to the result. Knowing the algorithm for solving one problem, we can reach the solution of another problem of the same class. This knowledge is prescription. Algorithmization of activities saves effort. Ordinary knowledge is crumbly - it is a conglomeration of facts, ideas. This knowledge is largely prescription in nature. This knowledge is unfounded, does not require explanation, because it is embedded in the very structures of practice.

3. Cannot resort to tradition, because he masters such forms of reality that are not yet present in tradition. Justified by tradition, prescription.

4. It is impossible to pull out some part of a scientific theory. If you pull something out of ordinary knowledge, it will not suffer.

5. Needs appropriate means of knowledge - devices and theoretical methods Does not need special means

6. Needs special language Uses regular language

7. Cannot be carried out without special preparation of the subject. The subject is every person.

8. Carries out critical reflection on his results and methods The method is not even explicated (not revealed)

Science, as the most important form of human cognition in its interaction with various spheres of society, performs, firstly, a cultural and ideological function, setting guidelines for the structure and structure of the Universe, the origin and essence of life, and the origin of man. It took dramatic events associated with the burning of J. Bruno, the abdication of G. Galileo, the rejection of the teachings of Charles Darwin on the origin of species, before science became the decisive sphere of culture, and then education, which determines the worldview status of a person. Secondly, the function of the direct productive force, given the unlimited scale and pace scientific and technological progress, the closest connection between science and technology, the powerful potential of science, which radically changes the nature of material production and industry.

Thirdly, the function of social power, when the results and methods of science are used to develop long-term plans and programs for social and economic development, in solving global problems of our time, systemic impact on public life, technical and economic development, social management, worldview education and upbringing of modern humanity.

Fourthly, due to its ability to go beyond the limits of existing practice and work with ideal objects, it actively performs a prognostic function, providing scientifically based models of the future development of natural, social and spiritual being.

Classification of scientific research methods

The diversity of human activities causes a diverse range of methods that can be classified according to a variety of criteria.

First of all, it is necessary to highlight the methods of spiritual, ideal, including scientific, practical, material activity.

At present, it has become obvious that the system of methods, methodology cannot be limited only to the sphere of scientific knowledge, it must go beyond it and certainly include the sphere of practice in its orbit. At the same time, it is necessary to bear in mind the close interaction of these two spheres.

As for the methods of science, there may be several reasons for their division into groups. So, depending on the role and place in the process of scientific knowledge, one can single out formal and meaningful methods, empirical and theoretical, fundamental and applied methods, research and presentation methods, etc.

The content of the objects studied by science serves as a criterion for distinguishing between the methods of natural science and the methods of the social sciences and the humanities. In turn, the methods of the natural sciences can be divided into methods for studying non-living nature and methods for studying living nature, etc. There are also qualitative and quantitative methods, unambiguously deterministic and probabilistic, methods of direct and indirect cognition, original and derivatives, etc.

Characteristic features scientific method: objectivity, reproducibility, heuristic, necessity, concreteness, etc.

In modern science, the most common multilevel concept of methodological knowledge. In this regard, all methods of scientific knowledge can be divided into the following main groups: according to the degree of generality and breadth of application. No less widespread is the classification of methods of scientific knowledge, which is based on the criteria for applying methods at different levels of scientific knowledge. Depending on the level of knowledge, there are methods of empirical and theoretical levels (Fig. 2).

Consider the classification of methods of scientific knowledge according to the degree of generality.

1. General or philosophical methods, among which the most ancient are dialectical and metaphysical.

The metaphysical method is a philosophical method of cognition and action that opposes the dialectical method as its antipode; a characteristic feature of metaphysics is one-sidedness, the absolutization of one side of the process of cognition or one or another element of the whole, a moment of activity in any of its forms.

The dialectical method of philosophical knowledge and the way of thinking are based on the analysis of all possible points of view on the subject under study. Such an analysis of different points of view is reduced to a clash of opposing positions, which are usually called the thesis and antithesis.

So, the dialectical method in K. Marx was combined with materialism, and in G. Hegel - with idealism.

Rice. 2. Methods of scientific knowledge

Russian scientists, as a rule, use the dialectical method to study the studied phenomena and processes of social life, since the laws of dialectics are of universal importance - they are inherent in the development of nature, society and thinking. When studying objects and phenomena, dialectics recommends proceeding from the following principles.

1. Consider the objects under study in the light of dialectical laws:

a) unity and struggle of opposites;

b) the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones;

c) negation of negation.

2. Describe, explain and predict the studied phenomena and processes, based on philosophical categories:

General, special and singular;

The essence of the phenomenon;

Possibilities and reality;

Necessary and accidental;

Causes and effects.

3. Treat the object of study as an objective reality.

4. Consider the objects and phenomena under study:

a) comprehensively;

b) in universal connection and interdependence;

c) in continuous change, development;

d) concretely-historically.

5. Check the acquired knowledge in practice.

In essence, each philosophical concept has a methodological function, is a kind of way of mental activity. Therefore, philosophical methods are not limited to the two named. They also include such methods as analytical (characteristic of modern analytical philosophy), intuitive, phenomenological, hermeneutic (understanding), etc.

The philosophical method that provides correct and accurate ideas about the general laws of tourism development, its originality and constituent components, as well as the place and role in it of those phenomena that scientists and specialists study, is the dialectical approach. This methodology proceeds from the materiality of the world around us, in which matter is in continuous motion, development.

The driving forces of the development of the surrounding world (matter) obey the laws of dialectics - the unity and struggle of opposites, the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones, the negation of negation.

2. General scientific approaches and research methods, which have been widely developed and applied in science. They act as a kind of "intermediate" methodology between philosophy and the fundamental theoretical and methodological provisions of the special sciences.

The characteristic features of general scientific concepts are:

a) firstly , commonality in their content of individual properties, features, concepts of a number of particular sciences and philosophical categories;

b) secondly, the possibility of their formalization, refinement by means of mathematical theory, symbolic logic.

On the basis of general scientific concepts and concepts, the corresponding methods and principles of cognition are formulated, which ensure the connection and optimal interaction of philosophy with special scientific knowledge and its methods.

General scientific or general logical methods are analysis, synthesis, generalization, abstraction, induction, deduction, analogy, modeling, historical method, logical method and classification. The ratio of general scientific methods can be represented in the form of a diagram (Fig. 3).

Analysis- this is a dismemberment, decomposition of the object of study into its component parts. It underlies the analytical method of research. Varieties of analysis are classification and periodization. The method of analysis is used both in real and mental activity.

Synthesis- this is a combination of individual parties, parts of the object of study into a single whole. However, this is not just their connection, but also the knowledge of the new - the interaction of parts as a whole. The result of synthesis is a completely new formation, the properties of which are not only an external connection of the properties of the components, but also the result of their internal interconnection and interdependence.

Rice. 3. General scientific methods

Analysis and synthesis are methods for determining the optimal balance of forces and means necessary for the successful functioning of a tourist enterprise. They allow you to establish the elements that make up the effect of the interaction of personnel, to give an idea of their capabilities in achieving an economic effect. Analysis and synthesis are used in the study, for example, of the work of a tourist enterprise for a financial year, which is divided into quarters, establish the relationship between them, and then reproduce the operations as a whole.

Through these methods, the positive aspects of tourism activities are clarified, their weak links are identified.

The function of analysis is to identify various features in tourism activities that could be taken as a basis for systematizing facts, arranging them in a chronological, functional, structural order that characterizes a certain side of the development of the event under study.

The function of synthesis is to establish links between facts and combine them into groups according to selected grounds.

When analyzing, for example, it can be revealed that an increase in prices for petroleum products will entail an increase in prices for gasoline, fuels and lubricants, and this, in turn, will contribute to an increase in the cost of tourist vouchers.

Studying tourism in general or its individual types, the researcher mentally dissects the activities of the staff of each separately and at the same time reveals the connection and interaction of elements, properties and aspects of them as a whole.

It should be borne in mind that various types of analysis are used in scientific research: factorial, logical, content analysis, etc.

main goals factor analysis are the reduction in the number of variables and the definition of the structure of relationships between variables. When reducing the number of variables, the final variable includes the most significant features of the combined variables. Classification implies the selection of several new factors from variables related to each other. In tourism factor analysis used in connection with the analysis of consumer demand for tour packages.

Logic Analysis is intended to determine the range of those concepts with which the subject of research is described, the search for outwardly well-distinguishable features, i.e., empirical indicators that allow measuring the sides and properties, for example, a new tourist product. Logical analysis includes such procedures as the interpretation of basic concepts (interpretation of the content hidden in them) and their operational definitions (dismemberment of concepts into elements for which empirical indicators can be selected). Ultimately, signs are obtained, the measurement of which gives an answer to the information request of the customer.

Content analysis(from English. content content) - a formalized method for studying textual and graphic information, which consists in translating the studied information in tourism activities into quantitative indicators and its statistical processing. It is characterized by great rigor and systematic. The object of content analysis can be content various kinds activities in the tourism industry: international and domestic tour operators, competitors in a certain segment of the tourist services market, managers of international and domestic hotel complexes, emergency events affecting the tourism industry, legislative acts of individual countries in the hospitality industry. The content analysis method is used to study documentary sources and as an auxiliary tool for questioning, observation, testing, mass communications research, and marketing.

Generalization is the process of transition from the singular to the general, from the less general to the more general.

Mental generalization is based on the generality of the connections between objects and phenomena of reality, the relationship between the individual and the general in all really existing tourist events. In a separate type of tourism there are not only individual features inherent only to it, but also common, similar features. The formation of generalizing provisions (concepts, laws, conclusions, concepts) is possible through the study of the concrete.

The degree of generality of facts (events) can be different. Hence the difference in the levels of generalization - from the establishment of the simplest, elementary similarity at the stage of empirical research of facts to the disclosure of the essential, general underlying the formation of concepts, the disclosure of laws and the explanation of facts at the theoretical level of knowledge, when a system of explanatory provisions, a coherent concept of the phenomenon under study is formed.

A complex form of generalization that makes it possible to distinguish important facts from secondary, is typification, which consists in the selection of characteristic (typical) facts that express the most important side studied phenomenon or group of phenomena in tourism. The selection of characteristic (typical) facts is an important feature of scientific generalization, which brings phenomena closer to the knowledge of latent connections. To reveal the essence of the phenomenon under study, a description is not enough, therefore, generalizations of a higher order are needed and those that reveal the repetition, necessity, materiality and causation of the signs of an event.

The form of generalization of experience in tourism is the conclusions, from which a scientific concept, a theory is formed, which reveals characteristics and the essence of the studied phenomena, the patterns of their occurrence and development.

Abstraction (idealization)- mental abstraction from some properties and relations of the subject under study and the selection of properties and relations of interest to the researcher. When abstracting, the secondary properties and connections of the object under study are separated from the essential properties and connections.

The method of abstraction allows you to identify typical connections and relationships in tourism, abstracting from the whole variety of particulars.

As a result of using the abstraction method, one can obtain abstract knowledge of a generalizing nature about individual patterns of doing business, the general goals of the parties, the causes of events in the studied segment of the tourist services market and their essence.

Induction- this is the movement of thought (knowledge) from facts, individual cases to a general position. Inductive reasoning "suggests" a thought, a general idea. With the inductive method of research to obtain general knowledge about any class of objects, it is necessary to investigate individual objects, to find common essential features in them, which will serve as the basis for knowledge about the common feature inherent in this class of objects.

Deduction- this is the derivation of a single, particular from any general position; the movement of thought (cognition) from general statements to statements about individual objects or phenomena. Through deductive reasoning, a certain thought is “deduced” from other thoughts.

Analogy- this is a way of obtaining knowledge about objects and phenomena based on the fact that they are similar to others, a reasoning in which, from the similarity of the studied objects in some features, a conclusion is made about their similarity in other features. The degree of probability (reliability) of inferences by analogy depends on the number of similar features in the compared phenomena. The analogy is most often used in the theory of similarity.

Modeling- a method of scientific knowledge, the essence of which is to replace the object or phenomenon under study with a special similar model containing the essential features of the original.

historical method implies the reproduction of the history of the object under study in all its versatility, taking into account all the details and accidents. It involves the study of the emergence and development of objects of study in chronological order.

The historical represents development in its successive manifestation, while the logical expresses development in its essence. For example, historically tourism was developed first from walking along the developed routes (in the forest park zone, near the sea coast), then hiking tourism appeared as a remedy -
health path.

Historical and logical in tourist activity are two sides of the same phenomenon, in which the logical is its essence, general line, quintessence, and the historical is a diverse manifestation of this basis through a lot of accidents.

Boolean Method- this is a logical reproduction of the history of the object under study, liberation from everything random, insignificant.

The logical method is based on the laws inherent in reality. In tourism, any phenomenon has a certain logic of its origin, development and transition to a qualitatively new state. For example, earlier hotel reservations for tourists were made by phone in small quantities. In modern conditions, the flow of tourists has increased significantly. Hotel reservations have become possible in real time via the Internet. For high-quality customer service, an elk appeared on the tourist services market a large number of tourist enterprises using information technologies.

Classification- a method of scientific research and generalization, the essence of which is that the studied objects, phenomena or processes are ordered into certain groups (classes) on the basis of some selected features.

General scientific concepts most often include such concepts as “information”, “model”, “structure”, “function”, “system”, “element”, “optimality”, “probability”, etc.

General scientific principles and approaches include systemic and structural-functional, cybernetic, probabilistic, modeling, formalization and a number of others.

Such a general scientific discipline as synergetics has been developing especially rapidly recently - the theory of self-organization and development of open integral systems of any nature - natural, social, cognitive (cognitive).

An important role of general scientific approaches lies in the fact that, due to their "intermediate nature", they mediate the mutual transition of philosophical and concrete scientific or private scientific knowledge (as well as the corresponding methods).

The fact is that the first is not superimposed purely externally, directly on the second. Therefore, attempts to express special-scientific content in the language of philosophical categories are, as a rule, unconstructive and ineffective.

3. Specific scientific methods- a set of methods, principles of cognition, research methods and procedures used in a particular science, corresponding to a given basic form of the movement of matter. These are methods of mechanics, physics, chemistry, biology and social sciences and humanities.

Thus, the methodology cannot be reduced to any one, even "very important method".

Methodology is also not a simple sum of separate methods, their "mechanical unity". Methodology is a complex, dynamic, holistic, subordinated system of methods, techniques, principles of different levels, scope, focus, heuristic possibilities, contents, structures, etc.

Consider the classification of methods depending on the level of knowledge.

The methods of the theoretical level include axiomatic, hypothetical, hypothetical-deductive, formalization, abstraction, generalization, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, historical, method of system analysis.

Empirical level methods include observation, description, counting, measurement, comparison, experiment and modeling.

It includes means and methods logical study and explanation of law and is based on forms of thought and laws formal logic. Dialectical logic is a theory of knowledge that coincides with the method of materialistic dialectics, and formal logic applied to the study of law is one of the special methods for mastering legal reality.
Law, by virtue of its peculiarities, is the most fertile ground for the application of logic. It is formally defined, logically consistent, strictly fixed system, includes a lot of legislative definitions that must comply with the rules for defining concepts (definition through the closest genus and specific difference, genetic definition, description of indications, etc.).
Each of the laws of logic (identity, contradiction, excluded third, sufficient reason) fully manifests itself in law, reflecting its features. All basic legal procedures and processes (and above all - law-making and law enforcement) are built in strict accordance with the forms of thinking - the rules for operating with concepts, judgments, and conclusions.
Any legal norm is a judgment, and it must meet the requirements of judgment.
The application of a rule of law to a specific situation, a specific person, is a deductive inference (syllogism), where the rule of law is a major premise, the case under consideration is a minor premise, and the decision in the case is a conclusion. Boolean operations and methods of proof, analogy - since ancient times in the arsenal of jurisprudence.
The use of logical means in the study and explanation of law makes it possible to avoid contradictions in the construction of legislation, to build a logically consistent and thus effective system of law, to agree on the positive, i.e. existing law, with the requirements of natural law, finally, correctly and competently apply legal norms.
The logical method is also successfully applied in the study of the state. The priority here is dialectical logic. Thanks to it, one can find out the objective prerequisites for the emergence and existence of the state, general patterns its functioning. However, only the unity of dialectical and formal logic in the analysis of the state gives a complete picture of the logic of the state. It is as follows: state representative and executive power, as an expression of the interests of the people; the ratio of popular, state and national sovereignty, the most optimal form of the state and its effective functions, balanced branches of power. Outside of this logic, the state cannot exist. Those who destroy the logic of the state destroy the state itself. A sad example of this is modern Russia.
Wide use of laws and forms logical thinking, logical means in jurisprudence led to the formation in the theory of state and law of a powerful area of research - the logic of law and state.
In addition to comparative, sociological, formal legal, logical methods, other special methods for studying law are used in the theory of state and law and in jurisprudence in general: modeling method, cybernetic methods, methods of using electronic computers, etc. But the methods described above are most common in legal science and practice.
The widespread use of special methods in law determines, as already noted, the emergence of relatively autonomous trends in the theory of state and law. These directions are the constituent parts of the theory of state and law. Therefore, not only the subject of science and academic discipline determines their method, but the method directly affects the formation of the subject.
Thus, the following components can be distinguished in the theory of state and law: philosophy of state and law, dogma of state and law, theory of comparative state and law, sociology of state and law, logic of state and law.
Legal sciences in educational and scientific legal literature are classified in different ways. Higher certifying commission under the Ministry of General and Vocational Education of Russia classifies legal sciences in ten sections. This is justified in awarding degree or an academic title in one or another legal specialty, but it is hardly expedient in educational or theoretical terms.
All legal sciences with a certain degree of conventionality can be divided into four groups: 1) theoretical and historical sciences about the state and law (the theory of state and law, the history of state and law, the history of political and legal doctrines); 2) sciences studying foreign state and law (Roman law, constitutional (state) law of foreign countries) and international law; 3) branch legal sciences (civil law, criminal law, etc.); 4) applied legal sciences (forensic science, operational-search activity, forensic medicine, forensic psychiatry, legal psychology, etc.).
The theory of state and law performs the following functions: epistemological (cognitive), prognostic (ideological), educational, methodological (ideological), applied.

General scientific methods logical and historical. Historical and logical methods

See what "HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL" is in other dictionaries:

historical and logical

HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL

LOGICAL AND HISTORICAL

LOGICAL AND HISTORICAL

Method, its main function.

Science as a specific form of knowledge

The science. Ordinary

Classification of scientific research methods

More on the topic Boolean method.: